Wannabe Freemason is now a CT mod.

WIZE

tbh wrote: »

yeah exactly. That's why I said his access to the site should be removed.

FFS Your a mod of Longterm Illnesses

Is there ever threads there about Mental Health and If one is started will you remove the poster from the site :rolleyes:

tbh

drkpower wrote: »

I agree with the access removal.
It is the bit where you publically refer to his mental illness that some people have a diffciulty with. Do you think that publically referring to his mental illness was doing him any favours?

YES! I already told you. It would have removed him from the site and therefore cancelled out the very thing which was obviously stressing him out.

drkpower

tbh wrote: »

and let me answer your questions with a question. You see a guy in O'Connell street showing all the signs of having a nervous breakdown of some sort. In your opinion, granted, but nonetheless. You see him getting agressive and shouting etc, and then the guards arrive. Now, in that situation, I would say to the guards, listen, I think this guy might be mentally ill. You might not.

Crap analogy - what you did was tell everyone on O'Connell Street that the guy had a mental illness; would that have been appropriate?

drkpower

tbh wrote: »

YES! I already told you. It would have removed him from the site and therefore cancelled out the very thing which was obviously stressing him out.

This is pathetic.

Do you think that publically referring to his mental illness was doing him any favours? Yopu could have removed his site access without ever referring to his mental illness.

Sarky

WIZE wrote: »

Sarky our accounts are our Identity as our Avatar are

If I spray painted the front of your house would it piss u off if you called the Garda and they told you to piss off ?

Mods & Admins are really the Garda of this site

Call a Guard a pig and tell him to f*ck off, see what happens.

If I had done nothing to you, yes, I'd be upset. For your example to be accurate though I'd have had to be egging your front door or pissing through your letter box first. And you would have to be a Guard. And anyone who's willing to piss through a Guard's letterbox has no right to be surprised when it comes back to bite them, as it were. Paint on the house is getting off pretty lightly, really.

tbh

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I really am surprised that you should need to have such things explained to you. For starters:
1. You have no competence.

this is a given, and I'm assuming people will not assume he is mentally ill just because I suggest he is.

2. If a person does not have a mental health issue, then a suggestion that he does is disturbing or offensive.

don't agree

3. If he does have mental health issues, then saying it to a group of people who have no role in dealing with those issues is an invasion of privacy.

don't agree

4. Putting the question out there in a public forum might exacerbate any problems that the person is experiencing.

don't agree. well, possibly, but imo it was the lesser of two evils.

WIZE wrote: »

FFS Your a mod of Longterm Illnesses

Is there ever threads there about Mental Health and If one is started will you remove the poster from the site :rolleyes:

there are several threads there, and and no, of course I wouldn't remove someone from the site, why would you think that?

tbh

drkpower wrote: »

This is pathetic.

Do you think that publically referring to his mental illness was doing him any favours?

YES! Why do you keep asking me the same question? Yes, I think it was doing him a favour. If one of the admins saw that post and agreed with me and removed him then and there, it would have saved him a load of pain. So yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, I think I was doing him a favour.

Yopu could have removed his site access without ever referring to his mental illness.

No I couldn't. I can't remove anyones site access.

tbh

drkpower wrote: »

Crap analogy - what you did was tell everyone on O'Connell Street that the guy had a mental illness; would that have been appropriate?

ok, I can see your point there, and ok, maybe I should have just said it to the admins privately. Fair enough, I take that point.

WIZE

Sarky call a guard a pig and your arrested ( Garda doing Job )

First insult to a Mod , Admin or poster is a ban

Its easy

A wanker Guard is a guard who will take the insults and give them back until he gets bored then arrests you .

Think about it

RoundyMooney

tbh wrote: »

No I couldn't. I can't remove anyones site access.

You could report the OP (maybe you did), thus ensuring the attention of someone like Gordon.

drkpower

tbh wrote: »

don't agree. well, possibly, but imo it was the lesser of two evils.

Wtf?

This is the type of pathetic defence of the indefensible that leaves a sick taste in the mouth. There werent 2 evils here; you could have removed his site access or removed his site access and referred publically to his mental illness. You chose the latter; there were no '2 evils' here.

And to even consider that publically referring to a person's mental health issues may not be detrimental to them is moronic, particularly in the thread where the guy was being slagged from all angles and was showing clear signs of paranoia.

Stop digging.

tbh

drkpower wrote: »

Wtf?

This is the type of pathetic defence of the indefensible that leaves a sick taste in the mouth. There werent 2 evils here; you could have removed his site access or removed his site access and referred publically to his mental illness. You chose the latter; there were no '2 evils' here.

And to even consider that publically referring to a person's mental health issues may not be detrimental to them is moronic, particularly in the thread where the guy was being slagged from all angles and was showing clear signs of paranoia.

Stop digging.

Once again, I couldn't have site banned him, you understand that, right?

Secondly, I agree that he was showing clear signs of paranoia. As you've just publicly stated.

drkpower

tbh wrote: »

YES! Why do you keep asking me the same question? Yes, I think it was doing him a favour. If one of the admins saw that post and agreed with me and removed him then and there, it would have saved him a load of pain. So yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, I think I was doing him a favour..

Then, you are monumentally stupid; and I dont mean that as a perjorative insult, I mean it as a statement of fact. Mental illness may not be well understood, but anyone who thinks that pointing pubically to someone's mental illness is a good thing really needs to read a book. And you are the CMod of the Health Sciences forum - that may not mean you have a medical degree but it should mean you have some semblance of common sense.

Sometmes you just need to admit you did something stupid rather than persist in this nonsense.

drkpower

tbh wrote: »

Once again, I couldn't have site banned him, you understand that, right?

Sure, but you could have voiced your concerns privately to someone who could.

tbh

drkpower wrote: »

Sure, but you could have voiced your concerns privately to someone who could.

yes, I accept that, and that's what I would do in future. I felt like it would be sneaky of me to not say it to the ops face, but the points you've made in this thread have convinced me I was wrong to think that.

WIZE

Tbh

I glad you took the time to discuss this issue with the people who are concerned about issues with this thread

Thanks:)

tbh

WIZE wrote: »

Tbh

I glad you took the time to discuss this issue with the people who are concerned about issues with this thread

Thanks:)

I'm just glad I could finally see what everyone was buggin about, and a bit disappointed in myself that I didn't see it sooner. I do feel strongly that mental illness is nothing to be ashamed about, but I also understand that it's not my call to decide that for other people - for that I am sorry, and it won't happen again.

RoundyMooney

Would that everyone had your latitude and open mindedness, teebs.

Aidric

tbh wrote: »

I'm just glad I could finally see what everyone was buggin about, and a bit disappointed in myself that I didn't see it sooner. I do feel strongly that mental illness is nothing to be ashamed about, but I also understand that it's not my call to decide that for other people - for that I am sorry, and it won't happen again.

Credit to you tbh for reflecting maturely on your contributions and coming to a reasoned conclusion.
The stonewall circle the wagons approach being used by others merely reflects bad on them.

Brown Bomber

EDIT: Feck it! tbh had his epipheny while I was writing my post.

People are understanably angry but I think they are channeling it in the wrong direction now i.e. towards tbh.

Rightly or wrongly he did/said what he thought was the best thing to do at the time. It was an ambiguous statement which he clarified that there was no ill intent. Benefit of the doubt and all that...

What has magnified his comments IMO is that it was in the midst of intentionally insulting and provacative and very personal insults - mental illness cracks, thanked by 20 mods, your stupid cracks, are you Jim Corr Cracks, and referring to his own admitted nervous breakdown.


What we're left with is:

Agressive and abusive OP: Poster banned. RESOLVED
Agressive and abusive responders: No action taken. NOT RESOLVED
Abuse of power by admins: No action taken. NOT RESOLVED
Failure of site to take accountability: No action taken. NOT RESOLVED

I think if the site is to maintain its integrity, when a wrong has been very clearly been done it must address at the very least the last unresolved point.

drkpower

Aidric wrote: »

Credit to you tbh for reflecting maturely on your contributions and coming to a reasoned conclusion.
The stonewall circle the wagons approach being used by others merely reflects bad on them.

Amen to that and +1 to tbh.

And, tbh (:D), the mental health thing wasnt the worst - im sure most of us have, at some point, questioned a posters sanity.... i know i have - the real cruel and unusual punishment was to fcuk with the guys avatar in the context of him claiming persecution & conspiracy (and where anyone with eyes could see he was a little, eh, unhinged). At best it was a little silly, at worst it was incredibly cruel abuse of an Admin's powers. Yet noone has bothered to say 'hands up, it was out of order'. That's all that most people want - we are not looking for sackcloth & ashes.

Nevyn

I can see both sides of this.

On one hand this was how people who started to foam at the mouth and cause a ruck us were treated, for a very long time on the site. Be a troll add nothing but strife and trouble to the site and you'd get the piss ripped out of you.
There is nothing on this thread which I haven't seen a few times over but was a lot more prevalent when the site was a lot smaller and everyone knew the track record of the troll/ranter. It would not have been out of place from when I joined up until late about 2007.

The more wound up someone got over nothing and more vitriol they spilled the more it would be defused with laughter and jokes at their expense, espicall if they abused the privilege of posting on the site and broke the site rules.


On the other hand boards has changed a lot over the few years, it's grown and grown and we now have a populous of posters who don't know the history and reputations of most of the posters, we have people who post in a pocket of a few forums and it is how a collective of communities. The rules have been tightened up and written down.

We have posters who don't know the old days of ripping the piss out of trolls
and posters for shíts and giggles. A lot of the time it was like mates tying one person's shoe laces together when they had been snotty or grumpy or mean, but as this place grown and admins and mods are expected to tow the lines and keep the new standards and more and more people don't know the people and personalities behind the mod/catmod/admins there will be more and more questions.

And what was once par for the course can seem out of place to people who join the site in the last 2/3 years. And then there are those who were bitter and some of them ex mods who never miss a chance to have a go, and again a lot of posters don't know their history either.

We have also had a new type of poster hit the site, ones which have had to be permabanned from forums or the site due to their obsessions with certain topics, be it from pi/ri as they refuse to get help and just keep starting thread after thread on thier 'problem' with out doing anything about it or getting professional help and then they move on to anywhere else they can derail a thread to talk about that, or that they are soapboxing on a pet topic and doing the same.

They never seem to take it well when we say sorry you are being cut off.
All their frustration and rage then gets targeted at mods and the site in general when they don't get way.

There are some people just not suited for the site, who just don't get it and for their blood pressure's sake and the sanity of others they need to be banned.

Most of which again posters won't know, won't have seen the build up of posts after post and thread after thread, bans after infractions and after warnings.

And even if there was a procedure to lodge an official complaint about a poster being made mod, they wouldn't take it. They want to throw a hissy fit in a very public way, cause as much disruption and leave chaos in their wake when they leave. But so many of them see to go slamming the door behind them and then try and reinvent themselves only to give the game away as they get back on the same soap boxes or indulge in the same pity part all over again which gets them spotted.

So if in changing an avatar to infuriate so that they leave and never come back, is that acceptable?

3/5 years ago I would have said yes, these days even with more and people signing up so the % of that type of person increases, I am not so sure any more.

drkpower

Thaedydal wrote: »

So if in changing an avatar to infuriate so that they leave and never come back, is that acceptable?.

That's a red herring, surely; everyone could see from about page 2 of this thread that the guy was going to be sitebanned anyway. That was inevitable. What happened was simply a case of tying the shoelaces of a dead man walking.

You are also ignoring the fact that it seemed clear that this guy wasnt a troll in the strictest sense. He had issues and anyone shuld have seen that.

WIZE

More like letting Demon play Russian Roulette and the Mods and Admins handed him the Gun

Everytime the Gun clicked the powers that be laughed

Until Bang

Brown Bomber

Thaedydal wrote: »

I can see both sides of this.

I appreciate you taking the time to post the lenghty response, and please don't take this the wrong way but I can't see too many mods/admins coming to the rescue of some unknown user to them in a helpdesk thread with "he was only having a bit of craic when he insulted him about his cancer"..."Think of the good ol days....

This is the first definition of bullying I found:

Bullying is a form of abuse. It comprises repeated acts over time that involves a real or perceived imbalance of power with the more powerful individual or group abusing those who are less powerful.[2] The power imbalance may be social power and/or physical power.

Lets call a spade a spade, it was bullying. Worse it was committed by people who are supposed to be role models on how we behave on the site. Worse again it was committed against someone who the consensus on seems to be that he was suffering from a mental illness. Worse still, the bullying (avatar/sig change) was a) initially denied b) defended c) minimised. And to top it all off not a hint of wrongdoing by the site has even been hinted at DESPITE all this.

Nevyn

drkpower wrote: »

That's a red herring, surely; everyone could see from about page 2 of this thread that the guy was going to be sitebanned anyway. That was inevitable. What happened was simply a case of tying the shoelaces of a dead man walking.

I am just asking a question, doesn't mean I agree or disagree with the position posed.

drkpower wrote: »

You are also ignoring the fact that it seemed clear that this guy wasnt a troll in the strictest sense. He had issues and anyone shuld have seen that.

He behaved in a troll like manner.
How are the mods to know if someone has issues?
Should we lower the standards expected on this site, re constructive posting, not derailing threads, not flaming on threads, obeying mod warnings and instructions cos someone has issues?

While I may have some sympathy for people, and I usually take more time then usual to try and explain, there comes a time when enough is enough.
If a person can't learn or does not wish and is constantly disruptive then it will end up with catmods and admins involved and they are fore the most part patient people who will take a lot of time with posters, but time and patience is not endless and no one want to be plagued by pms, and spend most of their time dealing with a handful of pita posters.

There are two in particular who I banned from the forums I mod and they went out on feedback just like deamonspawn (in one case serveral times). They both stalked me, hurled abuse and tried to tell people how nasty and callous I am, to get people to email spam me and to shun me and tried to shame me on email lists and other onlines sites I use and on my blog and on other people's blogs/site where boards was mentioned.

Seriously stalkery unhinged stuff, and they both re reg here every now and then and get spotted as they post on the same group of topics in the same way time and time again and then get banned and even if I have nothing to so with the ban assume I ratted them out and a whole new cycle of stalking/abuse starts again.

While boards.ie is mostly populated with intresting, witty intelligent people we still get a few clangers, there is some truth after all to the myths about weridos on the internet.

FarmerGreen

demonspawn
join date April 2010
Posts 1,406

Gentleman, I think you've just been had.
By an expert.

WIZE

FarmerGreen wrote: »

demonspawn
join date April 2010
Posts 1,406

Gentleman, I think you've just been had.
By an expert.

drkpower

Thaedydal wrote: »

Should we lower the standards expected on this site, re constructive posting, not derailing threads, not flaming on threads, obeying mod warnings and instructions cos someone has issues?

Eh, isnt this the point some of us are making.......?! I am simply stating that an additional reason not to lower your standards was because of the OPs possible issues.

Sparks

drkpower wrote: »

Do you think changing his avatar was a light hearted April 1 style pulling of the leg?

Yes, actually.

We have some people saying here that it was clear the guy had mental health issues - and then we have you saying it was all in good fun?

If the guy actually said he had mental health issues that cause normal social interaction to be damaging to him, I'd like to know why he wasn't immediately site-banned for his own good. Seriously. We have rules on this site about giving medical advice and about giving psychological advice. Look them up. They're there for a bloody good reason - namely that we don't have trained psychologists or doctors on staff, and even if we could find them, no competent professional would ever treat or advise a patient in a forum like this one.

If you're really worried about this poster's mental health, you're looking for completely the wrong measures to be taken here.